Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Routify routes not working with Rollup + sirv (sirv option needed) #450

Open
atava opened this issue Apr 27, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

Routify routes not working with Rollup + sirv (sirv option needed) #450

atava opened this issue Apr 27, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@atava
Copy link

atava commented Apr 27, 2022

Hi all, and thanks for this library.

Installed Routify (v2) manually, adding it to an existing project. Classic setup: Svelte + Rollup + sirv.

Main index/route was working, sub-paths were not. I did everything as per the installation page.

After some two hours of tinkering and searching, I came across this SO answer. Adding the "--single" option to sirv seems to have solved the issue.

I'm writing only to let you know that this bit about Rollup/sirv is nowhere to be found in the installation docs or elsewhere.
I know that Vite is what's used now, but I think any issues with the classic configuration should be addressed, being as it is very common.

Sorry if Issues was not the right place for this. Feel free to close/remove the thread in case.

@ghostdevv ghostdevv added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation and removed needs triage labels May 1, 2022
@ghostdevv
Copy link
Member

ghostdevv commented May 1, 2022

Hey, is there any docs left over from the pre-vite days that was causing you to miss the --single option? There have been a few times people have asked in the Discord in the past so it would be good to update the docs

@atava
Copy link
Author

atava commented May 2, 2022

I've just rechecked the documentation searching for that option explicitly and I saw a section about it, so it's very odd that I missed it since I read the page more than once when trying to solve the issue.

Either I stumbled upon some sort of older documentation as you say or I did miss that bit. In the latter case I cannot but say that I'm sorry and that it looks very odd to me (but can't exclude it).

Thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants